BBC: Ratko Mladic jailed for life over Bosnia war genocide

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by KGB_resident, Nov 22, 2017.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. As you may see I quoted (to back my point) the judgements approved by the Hague Tribunal. I propose you to do the same thing - to quote transcripts, judgements and so on to back your point.
    It's fair play.
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2017
  2. As in the case with Baha Mousa, for example.
    From my point of view any unlawful killing during a war is a war crime. So I don't see contradiction here.
    There is a big distance between war crimes and genocide.
    No doubt that all sides in Bosnian and other Yugoslav wars are guilty in numerous war crimes.
    But genocide?
    Accusations in genocide are clearly politically motivated.
     
    • Show again braincell Show again braincell x 1
  3. Whether they are or not, they do reflect the reality on the ground.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Just to be clear, Mladic didn't arrive at the Hague until 2011. Trial started in 2012. A conviction in (say) 2013 instead of 2017 wouldn't have made much difference, and he's been in detention all that time.
     
  5. Agreed. My point was he had started his vileness in the early 90's, atrocities all done 3 or 4 years later.
    So 13, 15 or so years before the cnut comes before a war crimes trial.
    That was my point.
    And remember, some people on this site knew he was a mass murderer way before a Court case said so .
     
  6. "Some people" would include myself. Your reference to "the process" could have been interpreted as the legal process. I'm now clear that you meant the entire history of international intervention and non-intervention.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. How many deaths in your opinion qualify as genocide? Do you see any difference between the outrageous and tragic death of Baha Mousa, not intended by any higher political or military command authority whatever their faults and omissions, and the large numbers of civilians intentionally exterminated at Srebrenica?

    The crimes committed against Serb villagers by Muslim forces from within the enclave, often overlooked in discussion of Srebrenica, could arguably justify a military attack on the enclave but never the acts which followed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Indeed, they reflect realities in modern politics.Though ... more right realities that existed 10-15-20 years ago.
    But we live in fast changing World. New realities are being created and (for example) any attempts to establish Tribunal for Syria would fail.
     
  9. You may well be right. Is impunity for war criminals a good thing?
     
  10. No I don't. I am suggesting that if you wish to say that the court erred in its judgement or that it was factually wrong in its interpretation of the evidence, it is for you to do the reading and quoting. What you are suggesting is nothing to do with fair play, for I am not playing your game. You want to accuse the court of bias or improperly sentencing the criminal Mladic it is up to you to prove your case.

    If you are correct I am sure you will be able to let the Trial Chamber know and they will set aside their verdict and replace it with one more palatable to you. After all they sat through the entire trial and heard all the evidence set forth by both the Prosecution and Defence. They listened to the witness testimony of the victims and others. Did you?
     
    • Like Like x 3
  11. It is not so easy question. Even one death of innocent human being is a tragedy. But it is important not to devalue the very term genocide by using it arbitrary in any situation especially as a political tool.
    Let's look at this example
    World War II persecution of Serbs - Wikipedia
    So in my view genocide means intentional murder of significant proportion of ethnical group without any exceptions - men, women, children, the old. In absolute numbers genocide means hundreds or at least tens thousands killed.
    I don't see big difference. In both cases military commanders didn't order to torture, to kill. But the war has own logic. Would you understand Serb soldier whose village was burned, whose relatives were killed by Muslim soldiers during raid from Srebrenica?
    Gen.Mladic ordered and conducted total evacuation of women, children and the old. Bosnian Serbs needed Muslim POWs for exchange. So gen.Mladic apparenly was not interesting just in mass killings. It contradicts to common sense. Also number of unlawfully killed is likely greatly overestimated.
    As for military commanders then couldn't agree more. But as for Bosnian Serb soldiers who lived in the area of Srebrenica then they had
    a reason to disagre with your (absolutely correct) statement.
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2017
    • Show again braincell Show again braincell x 1
  12. No, of course it is not right.
    How should captured officers and moreover generals be treated according to the Geneva convention? Right - with due respect.
    Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 135, entered into force Oct. 21, 1950.
    Now, let's recall this case
    Abed Hamed Mowhoush - Wikipedia
    You speak about punishment. Let's look how it looked in this case.
     
  13. Kindly do one. We are talking about thousands of people being murdered by your Serb pals and all you can bring up are irrelevant killings taking place decades later. As for your claim that Mladic should have been treated with the respect due to his rank as a general? Pardon me while I restrain myself from pissing with laughter. At the time of his apprehension, the mass murdering bastard was a civilian, not any form of officer.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  14. No, I meant that the Iraq general had to be treated by US military personnel with due respect.
    Apparently US military would not transfer any US citizen to any international court or tribunal to be tried for war crimes.
    I answered to the question.
    Indeed, it is important to punish war criminals but $6000 fine and 2 months restiction in movement look as disproportional punishment for brutal murder during torture of POW in the rank of general.
     
  15. I'm somewhat irritated that it took so many years to resolve the matter.
     
    • Like Like x 1